Friday, August 07, 2009

I'm Telling!

Here's what I just sent to :

I'm telling on myself, because I often tell people in "casual conversation" that the government needs to stay completely out of healthcare. Not only is there no need for "health care reform" or "health insurance reform," all of the regulations that doctors, nurses, insurance companies, and employers currently need to follow should be completely repealed.

A Republic, if you can keep it!

Jennifer Casey

In response to (emphasis added):

There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to

This is a real opportunity for those of us who do NOT want the government to take over our health system to tell the White House directly what you think. They asked for it! Don't let this opportunity pass by. Even something very short will do.

To add to the Downright Horrifying File, here's some language from the Healthcare Bill in the House (quoted from one of my local homeschool lists--my emphasis added):

This provision provides federal funds for states to institute and promote "program-determined child and parenting outcomes."

It establishes home inspections by government employees to observe parent and child behavior, and monitor the attainment of outcomes - outcomes established by government. Those conducting the inspections are required to collect information about families, and provide this information to other government agencies.

This is a very dangerous provision.

Program-determined (by whom?). Child and parenting OUTCOMES. Outcomes = Results. If you do not accomplish the results determined by the program, then what could happen?

I agree with the person who first posted this on our local homeschool list. This is a VERY dangerous provision.


Elisheva Hannah Levin said...

I'm heading over to tell on myself as well.

Beth said...

RE: "There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation."

Another tact is to send in a notification whenever you read/hear Pres. Obama dispense disinformation. An example is calling this a crisis when over 85% of Americans have medical insurance, or stating that 47 million Americans are uninsured, or that he does not want a single-payer plan (read socialized medicine.) For more details see my posts on Wealth is Not the Problem".

Scott said...

At the risk of sounding like I'm defending this bill/provision, it's worth pointing out that this part is prefaced by:

"...expenditures to provide voluntary home visitation for as many families with young children (under the age of school entry) and families expecting children as practicable, through the implementation or expansion of high quality home visitation programs..."

It's talking about funding a voluntary program, not implementing a mandatory practice.

Rational Jenn said...

Scott, I hear what you're saying, but I am deeply skeptical of any new program the government is funding for "voluntary" participation. Over time, "voluntary" programs tend to become "mandatory" as those in power want to justify their jobs and continued funding.

This is also why I advocate to fellow GA homeschoolers, for example, that they only provide the minimum information as required by law, and do not provide one tiny bit more. It's not that the government would necessarily do more with 4 bits of information versus 3. It's the principle of the thing. And it's also acknowledging the simple fact that it's THEY who can change the rules at any time, since they are the ones with the power to force compliance.

Especially when it comes to anything having to do with my children. I know that if it wanted to, the government could (not saying they will, but that they *could*) take my children away from me if I do not follow their rules and jump their hoops, and that especially in cases where children are involved, the government tends to take first and listen to evidence later, so I tend to be extremely leery of any government programs that have to do with children. Even if they start out "voluntary."

Scott said...

Jenn, I agree with your conclusions. I am just concerned with people misrepresenting parts of the debate and then being accused of hyperbole or distortion. If we don't present the facts accurately, the rest of our arguments will get ignored.

By the way, I really enjoy your blog -- it has helped bring a whole new perspective to raising our 3 year old son (and soon to be 2nd).